Back
J. K. MAHESHWARI, RAJESH BINDAL
Nutan Bharti Gram Vidyapith – Appellant
Versus
Government of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAJESH BINDAL, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The Private College1 [Nutan Bharti Gram Vidyapith] covered under the Grant-in-Aid scheme of the State Government has filed the present appeal impugning the orders passed by the High Court2 [High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad] dated 26.07.20223 [Letters Patent Appeal Number 1456 of 2010] and 21.04.2023.4 [Miscellaneous Civil Application (for Review) Number 01 of 2022]
3. At the time of hearing, the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that he only wishes to press the claim regarding liability of the appellant-college to pay retiral benefits to the respondent-employee.
4. Briefly noticed, the facts are that the respondent no. 2 was appointed as lecturer by the appellant. On account of certain misconduct, he was issued a chargesheet on 07.08.1993. After inquiry, he was dismissed from service on 06.06.1994.
4.1 Aggrieved by the dismissal, the respondent no. 2 preferred an appeal to the Joint Director of Higher Education (appellate authority). The said appeal was dismissed as not maintainable vide order dated 15.11.1994.
4.2 By order dated 20.03.1996, in an application5 [Special Civil Application Number 12822 of 1994] fi
The court affirmed that under the Grant-in-Aid Scheme, the State is liable for the payment of retiral benefits to employees, and the appellant cannot shift this burden due to its litigation conduct.
Employees superannuated before the takeover of educational institutions by the State cannot claim gratuity and leave encashment from the State as those liabilities remain with the private institution....
Post-retiral benefits cannot be claimed without explicit legal provisions; temporary status of an institution does not confer entitlement to benefits as a permanent employee.
Retired teachers are entitled to enhanced gratuity of Rs.20,00,000/- as per applicable resolutions, receiving statutory interest from the notification date, reinforcing pension rights.
Charges of moral turpitude cannot be equated with legitimate complaints by an employee seeking redress for service rights; failure to comply with reinstatement orders deprives the employee of rightfu....
Salary – Leave encashment is part of salary – In present case, management establishment was recipient of 70% aid, in form of grant – State cannot shrug its responsibility to shoulder its part of resp....
The court held that the petitioner-institution is liable to pay gratuity and leave encashment to respondent-employees for their service period, as per the applicable rules and acts.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
